Video Camera

Some thoughts on what event captured on video tape would revolutionize this world:

• The birth of Jesus

Only because I suspect it would de-mythologize things quite a bit. We've been taught to think that it was a somehow different birth, when in fact there's nothing in the Bible to cast doubt on it being anything more than a normal human birth. I'm sure the baby Jesus did not have a halo around his head, nor did the manger glow and cast shadows.

The implication of that de-mythologizing could be profound. It wouldn't refute anything about Jesus, his life or what he was or did ... but it would be a pin in the balloon of a lot of people's picture of it.

• Moses parting the Red Sea

This is something everyone has in their minds because of movies. But I think everyone (including me) harbours a bit of doubt about the reality of it. Imagine removing the deniability of it with an impossible-to-falsify recording of the actual event. I think that would make people pause and really think about the existence of God, and the presence of the supernatural.

• Pretty much any one of Jesus' miracles

Two in particular come to mind: his walking on water, and his calming the sea with his command.

Note: in reality, just capturing Jesus on film doing nothing more than talking would be revolutionary. Everyone has an impression in their mind what he looks like and what he sounds like. To reinforce/refute that with tape would be mindboggling.

• The conversion of Paul on the road to Damascus

I'm stuck in a rut on the Christian themes. :-)

• Abraham Lincoln delivering his Gettysburg address

There is a common impression among Americans that the Gettysburg address was delivered in some almost supernatural manner ... but I suspect the truth of it was that Lincoln voice was nasally (I've read that), that the crowd probably wasn't silent, and given how short it was, the import of it was probably lost on many people at the time. The grandeur of that speech was gloss added through time. To burst that bubble by showing the actual event might go a long way to de-mythologize Lincoln.

I could make a similar argument for nearly any of the great men (or women) of the past ... Napolean, Caesar, Alexander the Great, etc.

• The death of Ghengis Khan

Only because it was immortalized by Monty Python. :-)

My answers

If one planet in our solar system, other than Earth, could be made to simply disappear, which would ...

• Have the most profound impact on the structure and mechanics of our system?
• Have the most profound impact on the collective imagination of mankind?
  

Jupiter for sure. Jupiter has more than twice the mass of all the other planets combined and it's stabilizing gravitational influence is probably the reason that we have a Solar System of planets in the first place. It also acts as a giant vacuum cleaner for comets (remember Shoemaker-Levy 9) that are circling the sun, thus protecting the inner planets. If it disappeared it would seriously destable the orbits of all the planets, probably causing the Earth's orbit to shift inwards towards the sun where we would all fry. Before we got pumelled by comets from the Oort cloud that surrounds the sun.

Mars - if the God of war went then there would no more wars right? :-)

What's more common in modern-day debate ...

• Premises stated, but poorly established as true, or
  
• Unstated premises, simply assumed to be true, or
  
• Poorly argued conclusions stemming from premises, or
  
• Conclusions that have no relationship to premises previously asserted?

Common - but then it's not really a debate because one side dismisses the other

Very common - then the debate rages around the assumptions being made

Most common - the debaters agree on the premises but not on what those premises lead to. This is because one party sees more than the other. This is how new scientific theories come out I guess, Einstein found a better conclusion to precession of the orbit of Mercury than Newton, based on the evidence.

Very common - tangential logic. Guilty!

What's your favorite ...

• Meal you'd confess to in the company of business professionals
• Meal you'd confess to me here
  

Beans and poached egg on toast (I'm not proud)
Beans and poached egg on toast

You really liked that chip butty didn't ya !!??

If aliens came to visit us, which would freak out mankind more ...

• Aliens that were fundamentally different from us (think "Horta" on Star Trek)?
• Aliens that were essentially just like us?
  

We'd be freaked out in general. But if they looked like spiders we'd be more freaked. If they looked like anything that is in our instinctual programming to avoid, then we'd be more scared than if not. You make a good point about if they looked like "angels". Then we'd be jealous and probably true to breed with them.

If you were instantly transformed into another living organism -- and was consciously aware with your human awareness that you were that other
organism -- which organism would you LEAST want be? Why?

A fly. They eat turds. I'd rather be an amoeba!

If you had the ability to be immortal, what aspect of immortality -- other than the "Highlander" thing with friends/family dying off -- would be most disturbing?

Boredom first, having done everything that it's possible to do on Earth. Then when the sun goes nova living inside a fireball for a few hundred million years - which would be boring (and potentially painful). Then more boredom when the Universe ends and I'd be living in darkness for ever. zzzzz.

You have a video camera and a time machine ... other than the birth of Jesus, his crucifixion or resurrection or ascension (I'm intentionally ruling out the obvious stuff), what event of history would you want to tape and bring back to modern day?

Kennedy's assasination, was it really Lee Harvey Oswald?
Unsolved murders (to help catch the crooks!)
My father meeting my mother
Einstein saying "At what time does Oxford arrive at this train?" to a train guard
The Ministry of Jesus - his time in the wilderness
The Pyramids being built
The Construction of Stonehenge
Dinosaurs
Life first forming on Earth
The Big Bang (and before)

best of all though

God creating Adam out of dust.

How would modern society be altered if that one event you taped and brought back turned out to be radically different from what people thought it was? Why

Everyone would have to believe in The Bible then, and Genesis in particular. This might make a better world.

Disappearing Planets

Most Influential with respect to Gravitational Mechanics

Note: would I be correct in saying that the gravitational force is the active force when it comes to celestial bodies and their relationship to one another? The magnetic and nuclear forces probably don't ... right?

My guess is that the absence of Jupiter might have the most profound impact ... but I'm not entirely certain of that. It's awfully far out, and I'm not sure what kind of gravitational effect it really has on the inner planets. Would the absence of Jupiter affect the asteroid belt that lies between Mars and Jupiter? I don't know.

Most Influential with respect to Human Imagination

I should have specified that the moon doesn't count. If I counted the moon, adn the moon were to simply disappear, it's absence would impact everyone's sense of the night. The "cold hearted orb, that rules the night" would no more.

Other planets? That's a tough one ... none of the planets appear as anything more than a steady dot of light in the sky, to the unaided eye. The presence or absence of Venus wouldn't be readily noticed by anyone not specifically looking for it. That would be even more true for the outer planets.

I'm wondering if the absence of Mars or Saturn might affect people's imaginations; Mars because it's the one thought most likely to harbour evidence of water and maybe life (not counting Saturn's moons) ... Saturn because of its rings.

But I'll cast my lot with Uranus ... only because that would rob adolescent boys with one of the few sources of pure potty-humor glee that can be had from a science class.

Aliens

I think mankind would be most disturbed to learn that real aliens are something other than those portrayed in any Spielberg movie ... you know, round heads, slanted eyes, long arms. :-)

In some way I think people would find some reassurance that life elsewhere was just like them. There'd be a kinship there. I suspect that's why all the science fiction movies -- except perhaps low budget ones like "Star Trek" on TV where all aliens were human-like but with darker skin -- have aliens that are significantly different: oozing goo, lots of teeth, insect-like.

What would be interesting is if aliens were different, but not grotesque. Radically different, but indescribably beautiful or glorious. In short ... better than us. What would that do?

My Favorite Meal

As reported in professional company

If I had to be concerned about people thinking me weird about my real favorite meal, I'd probably say my favorite is either "Linguine and Red Clam Sauce," or maybe a seafood disk like scallops or salmon. And while I do enjoy both of those, my true love is ...

As reported to you here

Chip-Butty! :-)

Actually, my favorite would be meat loaf and thick steak fries, all covered in a huge pool of ketchup (or catsup, depending on how you prefer that spelled).

I love it!

Questions

If one planet in our solar system, other than Earth, could be made to simply disappear, which would ...

• Have the most profound impact on the structure and mechanics of our system?
• Have the most profound impact on the collective imagination of mankind?
  

What's more common in modern-day debate ...

• Premises stated, but poorly established as true, or
  
• Unstated premises, simply assumed to be true, or
  
• Poorly argued conclusions stemming from premises, or
  
• Conclusions that have no relationship to premises previously asserted?
  

What's your favorite ...

• Meal you'd confess to in the company of business professionals
• Meal you'd confess to me here
  

If aliens came to visit us, which would freak out mankind more ...

• Aliens that were fundamentally different from us (think "Horta" on Star Trek)?
• Aliens that were essentially just like us?
  

If you were instantly transformed into another living organism -- and was consciously aware with your human awareness that you were that other organism -- which organism would you LEAST want be? Why?

If you had the ability to be immortal, what aspect of immortality -- other than the "Highlander" thing with friends/family dying off -- would be most disturbing?

You have a video camera and a time machine ... other than the birth of Jesus, his crucifixion or resurrection or ascension (I'm intentionally ruling out the obvious stuff), what event of history would you want to tape and bring back to modern day?

How would modern society be altered if that one event you taped and brought back turned out to be radically different from what people thought it was? Why?

Accountability

You wrote:

Most people deny that they're fleeing from accountability. But that's what it is.

The most religious of us wash ourselves clean through repentance. Everyone is accountable to God but the clever ones of us hang their (our) sins upon the sky. In the process they (we) lose the guilt of what they (we) have done. "Hey, we're accountable sure but look how happy we are, we've repented and are now filled with the joys of The Holy Spirit."

Let's try and treat others as we would like to be treated ourselves, when we fail to do that, let's apologise, move on, and try to learn from our mistakes and not do it again. People of all religions, even those of no faith, can practise this, sometimes it is hard to do, but it is easy to know what to do.

Religion gone wrong

The details of your last post were just awful. I am reminded that we should never follow a leader without asking our own questions, and of the power of religion as a means of control. Don't forget that these children were not born psychopaths - they were taught to be - and hopefully they can be salvaged.

Please God put the war mongers on both sides in the pit together and if they want to fight then let them.

I had a beautiful afternoon with my daughter in the park, in the playground and on some bouncy castles we found near the old steam train.

On the walk back to the car she blissfully and joyfully rolled down a grassy bank (and got her top all muddy in the process) - she was seemingly without a care in the world. Your snippet reminded me that not all children are so lucky.

Iran

From an article in "The New Republic," which is an opinion journal here in the U.S.

During the Iran-Iraq War, the Ayatollah Khomeini imported 500,000 small plastic keys from Taiwan. The trinkets were meant to be inspirational. After Iraq invaded in September 1980, it had quickly become clear that Iran's forces were no match for Saddam Hussein's professional, well-armed military. To compensate for their disadvantage, Khomeini sent Iranian children, some as young as twelve years old, to the front lines. There, they marched in formation across minefields toward the enemy, clearing a path with their bodies. Before every mission, one of the Taiwanese keys would be hung around each child's neck. It was supposed to open the gates to paradise for them.

At one point, however, the earthly gore became a matter of concern. "In the past," wrote the semi-official Iranian daily Ettelaat as the war raged on, "we had child-volunteers: 14-, 15-, and 16-year-olds. They went into the minefields. Their eyes saw nothing. Their ears heard nothing. And then, a few moments later, one saw clouds of dust. When the dust had settled again, there was nothing more to be seen of them. Somewhere, widely scattered in the landscape, there lay scraps of burnt flesh and pieces of bone." Such scenes would henceforth be avoided, Ettelaat assured its readers. "Before entering the minefields, the children [now] wrap themselves in blankets and they roll on the ground, so that their body parts stay together after the explosion of the mines and one can carry them to the graves."

These children who rolled to their deaths were part of the Basiji, a mass movement created by Khomeini in 1979 and militarized after the war started in order to supplement his beleaguered army.The Basij Mostazafan--or "mobilization of the oppressed"--was essentially a volunteer militia, most of whose members were not yet 18. They went enthusiastically, and by the thousands, to their own destruction. "The young men cleared the mines with their own bodies," one veteran of the Iran-Iraq War recalled in 2002 to the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine. "It was sometimes like a race. Even without the commander's orders, everyone wanted to be first."

The sacrifice of the Basiji was ghastly. And yet, today, it is a source not of national shame, but of growing pride.

And some wish to "negotiate" with people such as these.

Neil Young and Other Stuff

You wrote and quoted:

Neil Young has just recorded an anti-war protest album: On the title track, he sings: "In the mosques and the doors of the old museum, I take a holy vow, to never kill again, try to remember peace."

Nice sentiment. I'm quite certain the madmen in Tehran and elsewhere would simply laugh at that. They have no intention of taking a "holy vow" to never kill; indeed, they've taken vows to do the exact opposite.

When they develop or acquire their nuclear weapons -- which is inevitable -- they'll not use them initially to destroy cities, but rather to blackmail the world. And the western world has no stomach for confrontation, so it'll capitulate. Europe first, then outward from there.

The threat to our future is not the nuclear weapons, per se, but rather the people behind them. And right now the threat is radical Islam and, by dint of silence, the rest of Islam that refuses to condemn the rogue element within it.

* * *
You're right, most people would vastly prefer an omnipotent God that has no particular individual concern for them. Such concern suggests accountability to the God, which is what our very beings flee from. That is why so many people try to eliminate God from their reality.

Most people deny that they're fleeing from accountability. But that's what it is.

* * *
On or about Easter each year the news shows trot out stories about the "historical Jesus." They're all the same -- they scrub the Gospel of any hint of the supernatural and treat it as merely an account of one man's life.

One news program tagged their program with "Jesus was one of the most powerful men alive." To that I had to laugh. Poor choice of words. If Jesus was God as man, then "one of" is wrong -- Jesus was (and is) the most powerful of all time. He simply chose not to exercise that power in his human form. But, if Jesus was merely a man, then he was clearly not powerful. Influential, perhaps, in his death ... but powerful in life he was not.

Thermonuclear War

Unfortunately this is inevitable.

After the atom was first split for energy in 1938, Albert Einstein wrote a letter to Franklin D. Roosevelt suggesting that atomic power could be a major source of energy in the very near future, adding:

"This new phenomenon would also lead to the construction of bombs, and it is conceivable — though much less certain — that extremely powerful bombs of a new type may thus be constructed. A single bomb of this type, carried by boat and exploded in a port, might very well destroy the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory."

At around 05.30 am on July 16th 1945, J. Robert Oppenheimer, leader of the Manhattan Project, watching the first atomic blast at Alamogordo (incidentally that first bomb they exploded there was code-named "Trinity") in New Mexico is reputed to have said, "I have become death, destroyer of worlds," misquoting the Bhagavad Gita. Interesting that he chose to quote and followed to some extent a Hindu text.

He also said that the physicists who built the atomic bomb had “known sin”; that he himself had blood on his hands. He warned against a postwar nuclear arms race, advocated the international control of atomic weaponry, and, questioned the development of the hydrogen bomb, partly because such a weapon “carries much further than the atomic bomb itself the policy of exterminating civilian populations.”

Scientists make bombs and religious people throw them at eachother - that one is all mine, Google hits are therefore zero :-)

Cry for the children.

Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek is set in a Universe after the nuclear winter on Earth. I do hope that we make it there.

PS. Neil Young has just recorded an anti-war protest album: On the title track, he sings: "In the mosques and the doors of the old museum, I take a holy vow, to never kill again, try to remember peace."

The Da Vinci Code

If you've read one Dan Brown book then you've read 'em all.

I did enjoy the first Dan Brown book I read, which was The Da Vinci Code, then I read two others of his and they were pretty much the same. Furthermore they all appear to have been written with the cinema in mind, you know - the George Lucas screenplay - the exploited trick of three plots all going on at once that all come together at the end. So I don't read Dan Brown books anymore.

Having said that I will sponsor this particular movie as part of it was filmed in my village in the UK (Tom Hanks has looong hair) and I want to see if my house is in it :-)

Ruth Kelly, a UK politician tipped to be Prime Minister one day is a member of the Catholic Sect Opus Dei. I don't agree with many of Ms Kelly's policies towards child education either. I would rather she lived in some other country truth be told. No that's not fair on the other country :-)

PS. I wonder if she wears a cilice?

No concern

Such a God should have no concern with you or me individually.

But he does.

Hmm, that attribute of God is a double-edged sword.

Let's be clear - although our God is a patient God He is not infinitely so. If we don't come to Him within our lifetime on Earth then we are bound to be thrown into Hell.

I am sure many would prefer it if God would indeed have no concern for them whatsoever, so that (following death) they could return to whence they came from. This holds much appeal (I don't have issues with any of the days that this Universe existed before my birth) - but I am told that this is not how things work so I must take note and beware.

The fact that God gave us life so He can choose whatever He wants to do with us rankles with our modern way of thinking of parenthood.

Safer just to buckle down and follow the rules and earnestly try not to sin. Who knows, we might even enjoy a better life for doing so?

Science and Religion

You wrote:

"If you can do this then you will understand that science and Evolution are not a threat to God."

You're right ... just as "The DaVinci Code" movie is not a threat to God, nor is anything of this world a threat to God.

But the inverse is also true: that God is not a threat to science and Evolution. That is a false dichotomy. It's a brilliant move by Satan. It makes one choose when one need not choose.

All of science -- all the marvelous details and mystery of it -- is made even moreso by the awareness of a mighty and sovereign God behind it all.

Such a God should have no concern with you or me individually.

But he does.

Happy Easter. Christ is alive ... and is with you and me.

And your daughter as well.

Jesus has been granted authority over all things.

Large Events

I am deeply troubled of late, brother ... the dark cloud on the horizon has me quite shaken. We face the very real prospect in our lifetime of a limited nuclear exchange. In decades past those who possessed such weapons had a vested interest in survival, which is what kept things at bay. But such is not the case with fanatic Islamicists who feel they must take a role in ushering in the last days. From your own Telegraph comes this.

Today in church we came to the point where we silently confess our sins. It occurred to me the traditional focus of my repentence is on minor things ... there is a much bigger sin of unbelief and distrust in my heart.

Sometimes I wonder if such things aren't placed to force us to confront things we can't directly affect. We are left to tilt at windmills or truly trust that God is in control.

I question my level of trust in the Lord. I really do. It is more than zero, but it is less than 1.

Jesus said: "If you continue in My Word, you are My disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:31-32, MKJV, emphasis added).

Sometimes I wonder if the freedom he spoke of was a freedom from worry; that "truth" is equated with true trust in God's sovereign rule, and that the freedom he offers is an assurance not just of some crass "insurance policy against hell" (as you so properly put it), but a freedom to know that ultimately we are safe with Christ.

Consequences

It would be very unfortunate were this to be the case. Is it possible??

The alternate theory focuses on the fact that in many animal species, the presence of a strange male is an environmental cue that induces sexual readiness in young females. Hence early menarche may be triggered by the presence of a "strange male" in the household.

http://www.menstruation.com.au/contributors/withoutdad.html

Something about this strikes me as holding water. Or maybe it's just my view of what's right and wrong colouring things? ie. a selection effect?

The article goes on to say:

Dr Ellis says that given the uncertainty about the genetic component it is too early to use these findings as the basis for social policy, but Mr Pershouse warns that they will only add to the angst felt by many separated males regarding daughters who are left behind with their mothers, particularly in households that involve either a new boyfriend or stepfather.

Yep. I guess I'll do what I always do then, bury my head in the sand and ignore it. Anyway, it's Easter.

Evolution

Believing in God is like being a child and in love. You don't know why you are in love and you don't care, you just enjoy it and cherish it and the world outside of this love is there to be explored, not feared.

If you can do this then you will understand that science and Evolution are not a threat to God.

If you can't do this then you are bound to repeat the errors of old.

A cure for cancer (and old age)

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v440/n7086/extref/nature04652-s6.mov

Gary J. Gorbsky, Ph.D., a scientist with the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation, has found a way to reverse the process of cell division. The video of it happening is at the above link, if you have iTunes installed it will play (as iTunes has a movie player called Quicktime bundled with it).

I don't think he needed an SOA or ESB to do this. You're right, the economics of a country relies on it's ability to grow. So if we stop, we die. Human procreation and Money Lenders (Banks) are to blame to for this. A Bank will give you a certain percentage return on any investments you have with them (it's called "interest" I think). This means that every company has to offer at least a better return than the Bank to get money from investors. So they have to grow.

If the population remained steady, and The Banks did not give interest on investments, then I see no need for inflation and the mad dash for growth that the west has got itself into. Economics only reflects human nature though which is the real root of the problem. People always want more.

My minor surgery is now scheduled for June 6th and I find it quite humourous that the consultant carrying out the procedure is Mr Christmas.

Cycle of Addiction

First, I don't think "batch" is dead ... I think there will always be a need to perform things against a long list of resources. The counter-argument is that this could be done "real time" ... but I suspect we'll always see a need to have certain things done in a contained, accountable, and auditable manner. However, batch is probably diminishing. But it'll never go away. On the day of Judgment there'll be some poor wretch who submits a JCL batch job prior to being cast into the pits of hell for eternity.

* * *
I have a theory about our IT industry. It is that we're caught up in a cycle of addiction from which we can't (or won't) extricate ourselves. This entire industry is dependent on growth and "new things" to sustain its existence. Everyone is frightened to death at the prospect that what we have now may be all we really need for a good while. To step back, pause, would imply a complete collapse of the industry.

Of course, I've been saying that since 1989, so what do I know?

Re-use

Thanks for the Alan Jackson number, a good back-to-basics worship song.

I have to agree with what you are saying about SOA/ESB not giving us anything new. I'm afraid that these are just the latest buzz words in a long history of buzzwords that won't amount to much in the overal scheme of things. Take "on demand" for instance - please. Or even Java, I mean, who cares?

And you thought that you were cynical :-) These days I am thinking that technical jobs are solely in the domain of "young" folk. As I age, I find my interest in IT waning, the trouble potentially is that there will be nothing else to fill the interest gap within me. Then again, that gap is always shrinking as the clockspeed of my brain seems to be reducing. There are longer and longer periods (but still usually in fractions of a second) between my consciousness checking-in with "the reality of this world" - this has the effect of making time appear to pass more quickly for me.

I'm currently on episode 5 of a 7 part documentary series called "The Long Way Around" in which Ewan McGregor (yes - Obi Wan) and Charley Boorman are driving around the world on big BMW bikes. For 115 days (well that is the plan) in 2004 they went from London to New York, East to West (thus the title of the series). It's a very entertaining and well done piece of work. In episode 4 which takes place in Mongolia, Ewan realises that the woman who carries two buckets of water on either end of a stick thrown across her back from the stream to her house is no less happy than the woman who pours water from a tap in London. He is struck that no matter where he goes people are the same, they love their children and they need to eat and sleep. We're all the same but we're screwing up the world says Ewan. The recommendation of this series is probably the best thing my mentor ever did for me!

On re-use, my preacher re-uses The Bible every sunday. Ah but this is not code reuse. Well, if you code any statement, say an "if", you are re-using the code in the compiler/interpreter that turns the "if" into 1's and 0's that the processor can understand, so re-use at that level happens often.

Object oriented programming really introduced the idea of re-use that most programmers think of - the ubiquitous class library. And it's true that languages like Java and C++ make heavy re-use of existing class libraries. This is not of course application code re-use. But as more and more of the application disappears into the middleware, this type of re-use will happen through osmosis.

Shame that the whole programming model needs to change for the massively parallel systems that are coming, led by the cell and perhaps this azul chip. A lot of previously re-used code now has to be thrown away.

In terms of a business writing application code, you're going to see re-use for common routines such as program start, error handling, logging and termination, but there will usually be around (I would guess) 50% or so new code in any program, Web Services or otherwise, that they write.

A question for you .... "is batch processing dead?"

The background is that batch was introduced during a time when processors were slow and expensive. Now they can multiprocess things pretty much immediately, so what is the benefit of the potentially archaic batch window?

ID Cards, Immigration ... Reusable Code

They've bandied about the notion of a national ID card here ... but this country has a strong libertarian streak running through it, and the idea often doesn't get far. But if the objective is to track our movements, then I'm not sure a singular card is necessary. How far are we, really, from being able to cross-reference all the different means of identification we already have? I've got several different credit cards and I'm willing to wager there are programs at work at this very moment that matching up purchases made on one agains the other, looking for patterns or other things that might yield a buck in a clever marketing play.

My lovely bride and I both get scads of catalogs from companies we've never done business with. They've drawn a picture of us based on our other purchases. Apparently I'm into high-end outdoor activities. Ironic, given I'm essentially a lazy bum behind a keyboard.

Two quick points, then on to my other topics:

1. I rarely buy tobacco with a credit card -- I never want an insurance application rejected because of some purchase somewhere.
2. Victoria's Secret (the lingerie people) are relentless -- it's been 10 years since I've bought anything from them, yet I still get catalogs.

* * *
We're having quite a row here about immigration ... specifically, illegal immigration, but that's not what the press is calling it. Some estimates put the number of illegal immigrants at around 12 to 15 million. There is absolutely no rational discussion going on at all ... it's all senseless emotionalism. I think the world as a functioning societal organism has gone past some tipping point.

* * *
Has anyone, to the best of your knowledge, ever conducted a study to see if the promised riches of "reusable code" has been realized? I suspect it has not paid off ... I suspect we have no more productivity than we did before. I'm willing to bet Java programmers end up writing an awful lot of code over and over again.

I got to thinking about this when I was pondering the whole "SOA/ESB" thing. The dream is that there'll be this "any-to-any" bus on which a program can simply request a service and magically have that service performed. But what I suspect will end up happening is that people will have the ability to statically configure the service connection -- using whatever addressing the bus will use -- so that in the end we're no better off than what we are now. The ESB thing is MQ V1.0 with more bells and whistles nobody wants.

Boy, am I cynical.

The Number of The Beast

Rev 13:17

And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

"You may have heard that legislation creating compulsory ID Cards passed a crucial stage in the House of Commons. You may feel that ID cards are not something to worry about, since we already have Photo ID for our Passport and Driving License and an ID Card will be no different to that. What you have not been told is the full scope of this proposed ID Card, and what it will mean to you personally.

The proposed ID Card will be different to any card you now hold. It will be connected to a database called the NIR, (National Identity Register), where all of your personal details will be stored. This will include the unique number that will be issued to you, your fingerprints, a scan of the back of your eye, and your photograph. Your name, address and date of birth will also obviously be stored there.

There will be spaces on this database for your religion, residence status, and many other private and personal facts about you. There is unlimited space for every other detail of your life on the NIR database, which can be expanded by the Government with or without further Acts of Parliament.

By itself, you might think that this register is harmless, but you would be wrong to come to this conclusion. This new card will be used to check your identity against your entry in the register in real time, whenever you present it to 'prove who you are'.

Every place that sells alcohol or cigarettes, every post office, every pharmacy, and every Bank will have an NIR Card Terminal, (very much like the Chip and Pin Readers that are everywhere now) into which your card can be 'swiped' to check your identity. Each time this happens, a record is made at the NIR of the time and place that the Card was presented. This means for example, that there will be a government record of every time you withdraw more than £99 at your branch of NatWest, who now demand ID for these transactions. Every time you have to prove that you are over 18, your card will be swiped, and a record made at the NIR. Restaurants and off licenses will demand that your card is swiped so that each receipt shows that they sold alcohol to someone over 18, and that this was proved by the access to the NIR, indemnifying them from prosecution.

Private businesses are going to be given access to the NIR Database. If you want to apply for a job, you will have to present your card for a swipe. If you want to apply for a London Underground Oyster Card, or a supermarket loyalty card, or a driving license you will have to present your ID Card for a swipe. The same goes for getting a telephone line or a mobile phone or an internet account.

Oyster, DVLA, BT and Nectar (for example) all run very detailed databases of their own. They will be allowed access to the NIR, just as every other business will be. This means that each of these entities will be able to store your unique number in their database, and place all your travel, phone records, driving activities and detailed shopping habits under your unique NIR number.

These databases, which can easily fit on a storage device the size of your hand, will be sold to third parties either legally or illegally.

It will then be possible for a non governmental entity to create a detailed dossier of all your activities.
Certainly, the government will have clandestine access to all of them, meaning that they will have a complete record of all your movements, from how much and when you withdraw from your bank account to what medications you are taking, down to the level of what sort of bread you eat - all accessible via a single unique number in a central database.

This is quite a significant leap from a simple ID Card that shows your name and face.

Most people do not know that this is the true character and scope of the proposed ID Card. Whenever the details of how it will work are explained to them, they quickly change from being ambivalent towards it.

The Government is going to compel you to enter your details into the NIR and to carry this card. If you and your children want to obtain or renew your passports, you will be forced to have your fingerprints taken and your eyes scanned for the NIR, and an ID Card will be issued to you whether you want one or not. If you refuse to be fingerprinted and eye scanned, you will not be able to get a passport. Your ID Card will, just like your passport, not be your property. The Home Secretary will have the right to revoke or suspend your ID at any time, meaning that you will not be able to withdraw money from your Bank Account, for example, or do anything that requires you to present your government issued ID Card.

The arguments that have been put forwarded in favour of ID Cards can be easily disproved. ID Cards will not stop terrorists; every Spaniard has a compulsory ID Card as did the Madrid Bombers. ID Cards will not 'eliminate benefit fraud', which in any case, is small compared to the astronomical cost of this proposal, which will be measured in billions according to the LSE. This scheme exists solely to exert total surveillance and control over the ordinary free British Citizen, and it will line the pockets of the companies that will create the computer systems at the expense of your freedom, privacy and money."

Kitt Peak

Thanks so much for those photographs, I didn't appreciate the fact that you are so close to Kitt Peak. I got into astronomy primarily through receiving a birthday present, a little astronomy book written by the British astronomer Patrick Moore when I was nine or so. Inside he showed pictures of the sun. Pictures taken in hydrogen light by the National Solar Observatory at Kitt Peak, and I've been fascinated with the place ever since.

They wouldn't point the Hubble's ultrasensitive deep space mirror at the sun to do this kind of work, the heat could damage it, so ground based observatories definitely still have their place.

Now I must pack and get on a plane and go to visit your beautiful country. Happy sunday Brother.

Friendship

Melvyn Bragg wrote:

In Greek and Roman times, friendship was thought of as being an essential constituent of both a good society and a good life; a good society because it lay at the heart of participative civic democracy; a good life because it nurtured wisdom and happiness. It is this period which gives us the texts on friendship which, to this day, are arguably the most important of their kind. Amongst their authors is Aristotle, who engaged in one of the great philosophical discussions on the subject. For Aristotle, friendship could fall into three categories: it could be based on utility, pleasure or goodness. In its latter state, Aristotle described it as being 'a single soul dwelling in two bodies'.

So how did the Ancients establish the parameters of the true nature of friendship in the literature and philosophy that followed? How have different forms of friendship helped or hindered creativity and intellectual pursuit? What has been the apparent relationship between friendship and power? And what of the darker aspects of friendship - jealousy, envy and exploitation?

If you have a spare hour to listen to this particular intellectual m*s*u*b*t*o* it's here.

I think our friendship has utility element to it, well the info comes my way anyway :-) But also a lot of pleasure and a lot of goodness. My apologies for being remiss in my blogging, I am fighting with d(a)emons at the moment, and not just the WebSphere ones ! I'll be in Palisades and Poughkeepsie next week also.

What Smarts Are

"Is there a universally held agreement of what attributes an 'intelligent person' is considered to possess?"

I doubt it. There does seem to be a general agreement on certain things, as suggested by tests like the Mensa stuff. But I'm not 100% convinced that's a good measure. I've known people who do well on those who seem ... well ... not too smart in a more general sense. And there are people who don't test well on those but seem wonderfully gifted in other ways.

Is there such a thing as "emotional intelligence" and what might it be.

I think so. But I can't define it. But I've read something about this recently. I guess researchers are starting to think there is a different set of "intelligence" metrics. Wikipedia has an interesting article on it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_%28trait%29

All I know is I've encountered people who are "traditionally" smart that I don't respect, mostly because of their attitude and demeanor (your attributes of prudence and honesty). And others who have intangible gifts and good sense that I admire.

It's a rare person who possesses traditional intelligence, intangible gifts and good grace. You, good sir, are one of those people. Truly.

Which may be why -- 8 years hence -- you and I are still exchanging e-mails, chats, and this blog. Think about that ... a chance crossing on that Net-Dot product way back when and here we still are.

Intelligence

Is there a universally held (well on Earth anyway so "Earth held") agreement of what attributes an "intelligent person" is considered to possess? And if so what are the most important of those, some thoughts are:

1. Good memory
2. Pattern recognition
3. Making connections between sets of data (intuition, cognitive stuff here)
4. Prudence
5. Honesty

Is there such a thing as "emotional intelligence" and what might it be. Is the richest man in the world the most intelligent man in the world? Is someone who relies on factual recreatable evidence more intelligent than someone who goes on faith?

And has 5, "honesty" got anything at all to do with "intelligence"?

Additional Insight

Thank you for your prayers. I wasn't that close to Dennis (who died), but I'm close to Doug his brother. He owns the cottage just below mine up on the island in Canada.

* * *
I was reaching for an expression of something deeper than emotions. The words in the Bible serve not only to instruct on our human level, but also to be used as a vehicle for additional insights as part of the ministry of the Holy Spirit. There have been many times where, when reading Scripture carefully, I had an awareness of a deeper understanding of something. It wasn't like a startling revelation; rather it was as if a connection was made at some level beyond words.

This, incidentally, is one of the reasons why the Christian faith can't be fully understood simply with words. A good portion of it can, but the truly effective understanding that occurs is due to God himself. That's the case for you, that's the case for me. And it's a life-long process.

* * *
I sit in Tucson airport waiting to depart for G'burg. I am flying first class -- I didn't request first class; American Airlines decided that I was due it, I guess, given my status with them. Well ... okay and thank you! But there's the thing ... the newest version of the TEA application flags it as an exception. (It can "see" the class of the ticket.) The ticket is "lowest fare within policy," so I'm not outside that set of parameters. But I still have to satisfy the needs/wants/demands of the TEA application. So now I have to justify why I'm flying first class. And my TEA will be flagged as an "exception."

It's a small thing ... and it pales in comparison to dealing with the loss of a brother or son.

Death and Poetry

I'm sorry to hear of your loss, and that of your aunt and cousin. I think that in a sense we are all living on borrowed time, perhaps the greatest gift the creator gives us is just that -- the actual time of our lives. My prayers of comfort go with you and your extended family and especially your aunt. I hope she goes forwards and starts to enjoy life again as soon as possible. And I hope that your cousin's brother had a good 12 years - those years that medical science gave him that he woud otherwise not have had.

+++

You talk about the feelings that words can inspire, like with poetry for instance. Shakespeare. This is all to do with our emotions. Emotions are great when they are good and horrible when they are bad. But at least we are alive, my point from above -- the greatest gift.

+++

I had some trivial stuff to talk about but it doesn't seem appropriate at this time.

Reflection on Psalm 91

Last night I got a call from my cousin. He had bad news: his brother had passed away. My cousin's mother -- my aunt -- has now buried a husband and a son in the last two years.

Note: my now-deceased cousin was actually living on borrowed time. About a fifteen years ago he developed rheumatic fever, which damaged his heart. He ended up having a heart transplant, which at that time -- 12 or so years ago -- was not as common as it is now. He had been living with that new heart for all this time. His death was not directly due to the transplanted heart "just giving out" ... but years of anti-rejection drugs takes its toll.

Anyway, I got to re-reading Psalm 91 I posted here. And it occurred to me that it's a good example of how the Bible is not to be viewed as strictly literal in every passage and ever context. Take a look at the Psalm. It speaks of things like God having wings and feathers, being a fortress and a refuge. Clearly God is not a bird, or a stone edifice. The language is clearly metaphorical.

But here's my real point -- the Psalm sits dull and listless if one tries to read it like that. But when one allows the Psalm to speak of the beauty and majesty of God, and the comfort and solace one may find in God, the Psalm comes off the page and the Spirit of the Lord starts to work in my heart.

It saddens me that some would shackle the Word of God by treating it as a lifeless, wooden set of rules and prohibitions. It saddens me because people who do so are missing something important. Scripture is not just words on paper, but words that can lead to further insights offered by the Holy Spirit. It's like Scripture is the fertilizer that prepares the ground for the Spirit's seeds of understanding ... if I may craft a poor simile.

I love the ending:

"Because he loves me," says the LORD, "I will rescue him;
I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name.

He will call upon me, and I will answer him;
I will be with him in trouble,
I will deliver him and honor him.

With long life will I satisfy him
and show him my salvation."

The Psalmist is quoting God ... and it touches my heart how gentle God appears in this passage.

That's the God that sits with K as she cries.

Psalm 91 -- The Lord is my Refuge and my Fortress

Such a beautiful Psalm ...

He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High
will rest in the shadow of the Almighty.

I will say of the LORD, "He is my refuge and my fortress,
my God, in whom I trust."

Surely he will save you from the fowler's snare
and from the deadly pestilence.

He will cover you with his feathers,
and under his wings you will find refuge;
his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart.

You will not fear the terror of night,
nor the arrow that flies by day,

nor the pestilence that stalks in the darkness,
nor the plague that destroys at midday.

A thousand may fall at your side,
ten thousand at your right hand,
but it will not come near you.

You will only observe with your eyes
and see the punishment of the wicked.

If you make the Most High your dwelling
even the LORD, who is my refuge-

then no harm will befall you,
no disaster will come near your tent.

For he will command his angels concerning you
to guard you in all your ways;

they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.

You will tread upon the lion and the cobra;
you will trample the great lion and the serpent.

"Because he loves me," says the LORD, "I will rescue him;
I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name.

He will call upon me, and I will answer him;
I will be with him in trouble,
I will deliver him and honor him.

With long life will I satisfy him
and show him my salvation."

Rejoice

Many thanks for your prayers in our direction brother.

Last night I prayed the hardest I've ever - for perhaps three hours or so, I trust that God will soften Pharoah's heart - or at least send in some plagues :-)

Shades of let my people go.

+++

For me there is of course a bright side, I get my first saturday "free" for -- well -- as long as I can remember, but I do miss my daughter. Perhaps I will spend it reading those Psalms you talked about ... :-)

Psalm 23:1-6 (A psalm by David). The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want. He makes me lie down in green pastures; he leads me beside still waters; he restores my soul. He leads me in right paths for his name’s sake. Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; for you are with me; your rod and your staff ­ they comfort me. You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies; you anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows. Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord forever

Yet the Heart Still Cries

I am so sorry to read about the struggles faced by you and K regarding the home situation. There appears no good -- or perhaps I should say quick and easy -- solution. You are in a spot where you must be extraordinarily careful. One false move and she who holds all the legal cards could make things even more difficult for you to be the safe port in the storm for K.

I've never understood the Psalms, mostly because I struggle to read poetry. But I know that in many the message is one of continued hope and trust in God despite what seemed like the Lord's departure from the scene. The message seems to be, paraphrased: "God is never absent, though it may not seem like he's near. Trust; always trust."

The Psalmist cries out over and over again in his despair, yet comes back to God as his anchor, his fortress, his hope.

Last night I offered a prayer for you and K. I will continue to do so. I will ask others to pray as well. There's something in my heart that says that right now, that's the course of action to take.

At all times, and under all circumstances, Jesus is aware of it all. Imagine his hand stroking K's hair as she cries; imagine the Almighty and Eternal God sitting right next to her on her bed. He's there; he's listening to your prayers; he's listening to mine.

Lord Jesus, hold K's hand. Hold deep.thought's hand. Speak to K's mother. Touch all their hearts. Let them know that you're near. Let them know that you care. Let them know that they rest in your arms. For your sake, with trust in you I pray. Amen.

The Lord Will Judge

Everyday, since last Sunday 13th March my daughter has phoned me up in tears .. "just come and pick me up daddy just come and pick me up". - Always those words -.I have spoken to her but I have not come to pick her up (apart from on Tuesday evening which is "our evening"), because if I did I know what that would lead to. My daughter is very unhappy with her mother and I feel totally ineffective and useless to help her, because her mother holds all the legal cards. It's worth me reminding myself and anyone who should happenstance on this blog.

In the name of the 3.96 million children in the UK
who live apart from one of their parents,
and in the name of their parents;

1. No child shall be denied a full and proper relationship with both of its parents unless it has been shown that such a relationship presents a risk to the child.
   
   
2. Gender discrimination in social attitudes towards parenting, in policy in relation to the family and the family 'justice' system should end.
   
   
3. The 'winner takes all' nature of legal proceedings about children should end. The objective should become the best blend of both parents. Both parents should be given Residence Orders. Demeaning ‘Contact Orders’ should be replaced by ‘Parenting Time Orders’ given to both parents.
   
   
4. Breach of a court order to allow a child a relationship with both parents should become legally and socially unacceptable.
   
   
5. Fathers' involvement with their children is increasing rapidly. This should be welcomed and encouraged until it equals the care provided by mothers.
   
   
6. No child shall be put in day care or looked after by others if parental care is available.
   
   
7. Legal aid should cease to be available to fuel conflict between parents. Public funding should be available only to seek child centred and non-adversarial solutions to differences between parents.
   
   
8. ‘Family friendly’ entitlements should be available to both parents equally.
   
   
9. Public money to support parenting - Child Benefit, Family Tax credits and the like - should be shared between carers according to the care and costs that fall on each. Child Support Agency calculations should be changed to reflect these costs fairly.
   
   
10. Allegations of violence and abuse should be investigated even-handedly with a thoroughness and speed that reflects their seriousness and urgency. Action should be taken against false or malicious allegations.
    
    
11. Parental Alienation should be recognised and dealt with.
    
    
12. Funding should cease to agencies that promote gender stereotypes.
    
    
13. Parenting should be given more social respect. The decline in the amount of time children spend with a parent - the cause of many of our social problems - should be reversed with priority going to making the contributions of the parents equal.
    
    
14. The importance of grandparents needs recognition. They should have the right to apply directly for court orders for the children to have time with them.
    
    
15. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child should be incorporated into British domestic law.
    
    
16. The clause 'equality between spouses' in the European Convention on Human Rights should be ratified by the UK and included in the Human Rights Act.
    

Dear Lord, sometimes (very often) I do not understand your plan, but there are children out there who are hurting. Please look after them and bring them happiness - I beg you for this in the name of Jesus Christ our saviour. Please help my daughter. Amen.

I want to ride my bicycle

There are a few bands there that I had to google, for instance, I had never heard of the Ozark Mountain Daredevils!!

Considering the phrase "I had never heard of ...", is it ok (in the USA) to say "I never heard of .."?

There are some subtle differences between the US and UK languages, more subtle than the obvious ones. In a supermarket (eg. shoprite in the US) the checkout assistant says, "Do you have a reward card?" in the UK if the answer is "no" then the response might be "No I haven't". In the US the response is usually "No I don't".

In the School of Rock chart I think bands generally stick to their "type" but there are about 20% of bands (my rough estimate) that move between styles. David Bowie was very notable in this camp (in more ways than one). His "Hunky Dory" was folky, "Ziggy Stardust" clearly rock, and "Young Americans" was soul. And "Low" and "Heroes" were new wave/electro. And perhaps "Electro" is the category that is missing, it would be up there near "New Wave" with bands like Kraftwerk listed around it. In fact a Kraftwerk song called "Numbers" started the entire "hip hop" generation when it was lifted by Afrika Bambaata and the Soul Sonic Force. Ah those were the days. Rap also loaned heavily from bands like Queen and Blondie. Perhaps the biggest omission on that chart is leaving out Queen, but there were some illegible entries so perhaps they are there and I just missed them?

What's your opinion on who/what is missing from that chart?

+++

Saw the "Cinderella Man" movie tonight. Ron Howard and Russell Crowe a good combination methinks.

American Idol - Revisited

I deleted the post with all the pictures. I didn't want the pictures cluttering up my free "Photobucket" space, so I zapped the post and the pictures. So -- and I post this because I know you're so excited about this -- I'll give you an update.

Yeah ... it's a sweeping gesture on my part. But because it's you, I'll do it.

Original 12 contestants

• Ace Young
• Bucky Covington
• Chris Daughtry
• Elliott Yamin
• Katherine McPhee
• Kellie Pickler
• Kevin Covais
• Lisa Tucker
• Mandisa
• Melissa McGhee
• Paris Bennett
• Taylor Hicks
  

The three that ended up in the bottom three, based on over 32 million votes cast:

• Ace Young
• Bucky Covington
• Chris Daughtry
• Elliott Yamin
• Katherine McPhee
• Kellie Pickler
• Kevin Covais
• Lisa Tucker
• Mandisa
• Melissa McGhee
• Paris Bennett
• Taylor Hicks

The one that was sent home was ... Melissa McGhee.

What I can't believe is that Kevin Covais, the 16 year old geek, is still in there. He's simply not that good. Everyone knows he stands no chance of winning it. Yet people continue to vote for him. Who? Why? I don't get it.

Next week ... another update! See? Aren't you thrilled? :-)

An Historic Achievement

deep.thought ... you've outdone yourself. That is too funny. I remember watching that movie and thinking, "Gee, I wish I could spend a little time on that to see what they have there." And now here it is.

It's a fine piece of work -- yours and theirs.

Let me ask you ... would you agree that any given rock band might be represented as moving through that progression? Or even be located in several different spots at the same time? For example, the Beatles started out as a purely pop band -- simple, catchy tunes. But by the time the White Album came around, they were into what I'd think could be termed "Progressive." Certainly for their time. The same for The Who. They started out doing basic pop numbers, but morphed into more of a "Hard Rock" band, and then started to drift towards more of what Pete Townsend does now, only solo.

Is there any category unrepresented on that chart?

The School of Rock History of Rock Chalkboard

OK I spent a happy two hours capping it from the DVD :-) I sent you the powerpoint also. In fact T-Rex appear on it!

Jack Black said on the chalkboard:

"It was Rich's idea to get the big chalkboard and he put down a bunch of categories and subcategories of rock - the rock family tree history. He said to the whole cast and crew, and that's over 100 people, anybody who has input, or an opinion even, come up and write one band on the board. So everybody kind of put the things they wanted and then I came in with veto power and erased a couple of things. "

T-Rex

I love T-Rex! I had their "Electric Warrior" album on cassette tape. I was around 14 at the time, and we'd camp out on summer nights and listen to that over and over again. Over in the United States, that song "Get it On" was retitled "Bang a Gong." I love almost every track on that album.

Odd you should mention the connection between Dire Straits and the Rolling Stones. Yesterday I was out for a run and I was listening to "Monkey Man" on the MP3 player. At the tail end of that song there's this guitar groove that made me think, "Hmmm ... that sounds a lot like what Knopfler does. He probably picked it up from the Stones." Music is all one continuous connection, all the way back to the first caveman who beat a stick on a log. "Uggh. Good beat. Uggh. Gimme woman!"

In the movie "School of Rock" (with Jack Black) -- a so-so movie, but it had its moments -- he does a chalkboard talk to the kids about the inter-relatedness of rock music. I'm sure there's been more studied treatments of it, hasn't there? For instance, I know the Rolling Stones were heavily influenced by U.S. black rhythm and blues. The Beatles were influenced by Elvis, who in turn was influenced by the black R&B and the hillbilly music of his youth. I've read that black blues in the United States, which emerged in the very early parts of the 1900's, was a product of the fusion of African rhythms and Irish music by slaves in the islands of the Caribbean. (As was VooDoo ... which is, I understand, a fusion of African and Irish paganism. The Irish connection comes in because I understand Oliver Cromwell pretty well routed Ireland, selling a good many women and children into slavery, mostly down to the sugar plantations in the Caribbean.)

Where is music going now? If you chart the progression from a high level, we saw the pop of the 1960's turn into the heavier rock of the early 70's. Much of that music was utterly undanceable, so out came a better dance beat, which turned into Disco. The reaction to that was the anti-Disco, punk. Punk expended itself in a few years and then electronic pop emerged in the 1980's. After a bit of that, the grunge movement started as a reaction to the slick, over-produced nature of much of the music from the mid-80's. Grunge started to peter out after a bit, and then I'm not sure what happened. "Hip-Hop" came in -- whatever that music style really is -- and now it's just all over the place.

Thoughts?

Portobello Belle and Quicksand

Comparing our two lyrically-favourite songs:

Dire Straits "Portobello Belle" 1979

Bella donna’s on the high street
Her breasts upon the off beat
And the stalls are just the side shows
Victoriana’s old clothes
And yes her jeans are tight now
She gotta travel light now
She’s gotta tear up all her roots now

She got a turn up on the boots now
Yeah she thinks she’s tough
She ain’t no english rose
But the blind singer
He’s seen enough and he knows
Yes and he do a song
About a long gone irish girl
Ah but I got one for you my portobello belle

She sees a man upon his back there
Escaping from a sack there
And bella donna lingers
Her gloves they got no fingers
Yeah, the blind man singing irish
He get his money in a tin dish
Just a corner serenader
Upon a time he could have made her, made her
Yeah, she thinks she’s tough
She ain’t no english rose
Ah, but the blind singer
He’s seen enough and he knows
Yes and do a song
About a long gone irish girl
But I got one for you my portobello belle

Yes and these barrow boys are hawking
And a parakeet is squawking
Upon a truck a paper rhino
She get the crying of a wino
And then she get the reggea rumble
Bella donna’s in the jungle
But she ain’t no garden flower
These ain’t no distress in the tower
Oh, bella donna walks
Bella donna taking a stroll
But, she don’t care about your window box
Or your button hole
Yes and she sing a song about a long gone irish girl
But I got one for you my portobello belle

David Bowie "Quicksand" 1971

I'm closer to the Golden Dawn
Immersed in Crowley's uniform
Of imagery
I'm living in a silent film
Portraying
Himmler's sacred realm
Of dream reality
I'm frightened by the total goal
Drawing to the ragged hole
And I ain't got the power anymore
No I ain't got the power anymore

I'm the twisted name
on Garbo's eyes
Living proof of
Churchill's lies
I'm destiny
I'm torn between the light and dark
Where others see their targets
Divine symmetry
Should I kiss the viper's fang?
Or herald loud
the death of Man
I'm sinking in the quicksand
of my thought
And I ain't got the power anymore

[CHORUS]
Don't believe in yourself
Don't deceive with belief
Knowledge comes
with death's release

I'm not a prophet
or a stone age man
Just a mortal
with the potential of a superman
I'm living on
I'm tethered to the logic
of Homo Sapien
Can't take my eyes
from the great salvation
Of bullshit faith
If I don't explain what you ought to know
You can tell me all about it
On the next Bardo
I'm sinking in the quicksand
of my thought
And I ain't got the power anymore

[CHORUS]

Note: both songs are from the 70's (albiet different ends of the 70's) and both are by British performers :-) Also I believe the riff-esque nature of the guitar in the Dire Straits song lends possibly from The Rolling Stones and perhaps even more heavily from Marc Bolan and T-Rex (another British Band) with their song called "Get It On" - which has a similar hammer-on. Incidentally "Get It On" was completely plagiarised by Oasis in their song "Cigarettes & Alcohol". Being in a stadium with 70,000 people going nuts over that one is interesting. It's a classic riff.

I first heard Bowie's "Quicksand" off the Hunky Dory album when I was 14, and being 14 thought "This is great - this guy understands!" I always felt older than everyone else and here was someone else singing about some of the things that I was thinking about.

"Quicksand" is very introverted and self centric, it shows confusion, searching, realizing how tiny we all are in the scheme of things, knowing that in this life we can't see The Truth, so wanting to escape from this life to discover The Truth. Portobello Belle is a voyeuristic third party observing human interactions from afar, probably written by someone on their second life (a Buddhist might say :-), and comments on age old sexual struggles and ageing that we all go through. The Dire Straits song is much more "male" than the Bowie number which is probably androgenous.

+++

Children should not be physically or emotionally bullied by over controlling parents. Treat others as you would wish to be treated. Do you wish to be placed in a box? No. Well then don't do it to others. That's pretty easy for anyone alive to follow.

Music Favorites

I'm not really sure I have these well set in my mind ... I crafted the categories without really having my own ideas.

• Favorite melody -- "Anarchy in the UK" by the Sex Pistols. Just kidding. I'll have to think about this one.
  
• Favorite rhythm -- "Portobello Belle" from Communique. It's slow and hypnotic (to me).
  
• Favorite overall music -- That's a tough one. I love Dire Straits, but oddly enough I don't listen to them much any more. But there are many of their songs I find entrancing.
  
• Favorite lyrics -- Toss up, both Dire Straits: "Portobello Belle" from Communique, or "Romeo and Juliette" off of Making Movies. One line from Romeo -- "All I did was kiss you ... through the bars of a rhyme." I love the imagery of that.
  
• Favorite way in which song evokes emotion (good or bad) -- Classical piano music will evoke unformed emotions in me from my childhood. Pictures of depression and sadness. To this day I have a hard time listening to it. On the other hand, Sinatra's "Summer Wind" is just beautiful and it never fails to lift me up (despite it being a rather sad song).
  
• Favorite way in which song evokes memory (slight variant of emotion) -- The Police's "Roxanne" will take me back to sophomore year in college quicker and more surely than any other song. The memories from that era aren't all good, or all bad, but they are strong. And that song will transport me like no other. "You don't have to put on the red light ..." :-)
  
• Favorite in terms of boldest departure from previous songs by artist -- Can't say ... I honestly can't think of anyone who's gone out of the genre and did it well.
  
• Favorite in terms of influence on your life in some way or fashion -- The album "Who's Next" was the first album that really caught my attention. And that was well after it came out. I did not have a record player or an FM radio prior to college, so much of the early 70's British influence was lost on me. But somewhere I caught wind of Who's Next and my fascination with the Who took off.
  

Are things getting tense at the new house?

Memory Lane Songs

I'll have a first pass at this for popular music:

• Favorite melody - "And Your Bird Can Sing" -- The Beatles
  
• Favorite rhythm - "Ticket to Ride" -- The Beatles and "Johnny B. Goode" -- Chuck Berry (my daughter loves to dance to this)
  
• Favorite overall music - Rock and Roll
  
• Favorite lyrics - "Strawberry Fields Forever" -- The Beatles or "Quicksand" -- David Bowie
  
• Favorite way in which song evokes emotion (good or bad)

1. Good - "And Your Bird Can Sing" version from Anthology II-- The Beatles
2. Mixed - "I Don't Want To Miss A Thing" -- Aerosmith
3. Bad - A Kate Smith song (racist)
   

• Favorite way in which song evokes memory (slight variant of emotion) - "Driving Home For Christmas" -- Chris Rea
• Favorite in terms of boldest departure from previous songs by artist -- The Beatles "White Album" or "Low" by David Bowie.
  
• Favorite in terms of influence on your life in some way or fashion "Live Forever" - Oasis. Fisrt guitar solo i ever really learnt. A great tribute song to John Lennon.

And your good self sir?

+++

I can put up with the resident parent picking on me but when she picks on Katherine I get damned annoyed. God grant us the strength to endure this spiteful soul.

Favorite Songs By Category

Okay, have at it ... what's your favorite song based on each criteria: (criterion?)

• Favorite melody
• Favorite rhythm
• Favorite overall music
• Favorite lyrics
• Favorite way in which song evokes emotion (good or bad)
  
• Favorite way in which song evokes memory (slight variant of emotion)
• Favorite in terms of boldest departure from previous songs by artist
• Favorite in terms of influence on your life in some way or fashion
  

Sad? Sad? Me? Sad?

Yeah, well ... okay. It's a bit embarassing to admit I like that show. But no, I've never voted. And I probably never will. It's an "866" number that's used to vote, and that carries with a charge -- probably a dollar or so. Not that I can't afford the dollar ... I just don't like the notion of giving someone money so I can cast a vote in an otherwise meaningless contest!

* * *
I can't speak much to whether the Stones copied the Beatles ... to me the music doesn't sound that much alike. But I'm not very good at discerning those things. I think the test of time has favored the Stones ... not just because they're still (more or less) together, but because I think their music has stood up well over time and doesn't appear dated. To my ear Beatles songs are clearly from a bygone era ... same thing with The Who and Zeppelin ... but some of the Stones work seems to be as fresh now as back then.

Did you ever listen to "Monkey Man" and pay attention to Richards' subtle backing rhythm?

I love the song "Gimme Shelter." I love "You Can't Always Get What You Want."

But most of all, I love "Get Off of My Cloud."

Just joking about that last one.

Hey, Hey
You, You
Get off of my cloud!

:-)

The Sad Sad Award ....

... goes to ... BAGWELL!!! But not for his excellent taste in one of my favourite Rolling Stones songs, but for his interest in American Idol.

I have never seen this program, or it's UK equivalent, but have heard of it of course .. after all I do not live in a bin liner buried underneath the Gobi desert, well not on weekdays anyway.

I hear your prediction. I scan read what you wrote, then went back and decided to make my own prediction based solely on the pictures. I think it will come down to the last two of Elliot and Kellie, and Elliot will win because he looks like someone else who won something similar so that must be the kind of look that the people who vote of such things would vote for.

Note: I would give the Christian Mandissa the wild card chance as a Christian won a UK reality TV show so obviously people are willing to spend money voting for Christ :-)

My serious question to you is .. have you voted ??

+++

Another thing .. what's your view on The Beatles vs. The Stones? Lennon always claimed that Jagger just copied everything The Fab Four did and that was how they made it. I suspect there was something of that (just look at the Jagger hero-worship of The Beatles in the "All You Need Is Love" world broadcast) -- but eventually The Stones came into their own. Again, I love that song "Sympathy For The Devil" and just this moment had to play it VERY loud (woo woo). A good choice for a Friday sir.

PS. I just got the title of your post "Gimme Shelter" some months ago :-)

PPS. Now listening to (I can't get no) Satisfaction - hey these are great lyrics. "A man comes on the TV and tells me how ... he can't be a man as he doesn't smoke the same cigarettes as me" ... deep stuff!! Marvellous.

PPPS. I was born in a crossfire hurricane! Oh yes. Just try not to move to that number.

Sympathy for the Devil

No, it's not a new attitude for me.

I mean the song by the Rolling Stones.

I love it ... always have.

On the way home from work tonight it came on the radio and turn it up.

Way up.

Loud.

Know what I love most about it?

The bass line ... it drives that song.

That's my Friday thought for the day.

"Morally Corrosive Doctrine"

You wrote:

I heard an objection to Christianity, that it is a morally corrosive doctrine because it undermines personal responsibility, encourages people to believe that God is going to solve all of their problems for them, kill all their enemies, and build them a whole new world.

I've heard and experienced similar things. Based on how some express and explain the basis of the faith, it's understandable why others may think this. I sometimes wonder if I might contribute to this, based on my own behavior. I hope and pray not.

I've given a lot of thought to how I might answer this. My natural tendency is to go off on a tear and essentially criticize those who think that Christianity is a "corrosive" doctrine. But I do not want to do that. The Spirit is convicting my heart not to go that route.

The trouble, it seems to me, is that the truth of faith in Christ is simply not understood. And at times I'm not sure that I truly understand it. But I sense it ... out there ... just beyond my grasp. The Lord is beckoning me to go find it, by stretching beyond the normal limits of my weak belief.

You see, Christianity is not "a religion." It is not a series of things, or acts, or even merely a logical construct of doctrinal points. It is so much more. And yet it is also a beautifully simple single point.

Can one who truly understands what Christ did for them then turn and lead of life of betrayal to Jesus? I don't see how. If one does, then I fear it means they don't really understand, nor truly believe in Jesus, despite their profession of faith. Matthew 7:21 is frighteningly plain: "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."

What is the "will of my Father who is in heaven?" Read the Gospels and study the behavior of Jesus. He did his Father's will perfectly. No man who walks this earth as Jesus did can be called "corrosive". No man who walks counter to Jesus can be called a follower of Christ.

I am not a perfect man, nor do I follow Christ perfectly or even well. I stumble and fall and give a poor example of one who calls Jesus Lord. But a small flame has been lit in my heart, and it is not of me but of God himself. I do bad things, things contrary to the wishes of God the Father. But I do not for a minute think that God is pleased with them. And his displeasure saddens me, for what I am growing to understand is that by doing as he wishes, I am doing what is best for me. Again, as always, God is giving of his goodness and grace.

I pray for those who profess faith and trust in Christ yet claim to be then be free to live a life of willful sin. They are lost children. I honestly believe God wants them back. Jesus loves them no less. But their denial and their sin is not what's best for them, and through their disobedience and denial they are rejecting the saving grace offered by Jesus.

In Phillipians, Paul writes to the church at Phillipi:

If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose. Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.

Phillipians 2:1-4

Properly understood and embraced with one's heart, that is not a "morally corrosive doctrine."

May God's love and grace and peace be seen by everyone so they might take hold and reflect that light into the world. To his glory.

Today my daughter moves house

... and you know this is where sometimes prayer works.

Alice was going to move away from the area we live in, taking the children, as she was heartbroken at the loss of her fella. But "good news" for Alice as her beau left his partner and now Alice has her man. So the immediate run-away instinct was short circuited.

Then unfortunately Alice's mother got sick and it transpires that the care home wants to charge her mother £1,000 GBP per week for residence. For the lesser sum of £250 per week rent, Alice can move to a much bigger house than the tiny one she is in, so it's a good deal for Alice to rent a larger house, move her mother in, and look after her full time (with her mother, and me of course, footing the bills).

So Alice needed to find a larger (rented) house in the area we live in now. Great! It transpires that the first house she saw was about 500 yards away from where I live. She didn't want to be that close to me so she kept looking and looking for a more "suitable" property .... Meanwhile the £1,000's GBP per week in the care home were stacking up so Alice felt that she really needed to move. So - you guessed it, she took the property that is 500 yards away from me !!

So as from today my daughter could *almost* walk to my house, although there are some back streets involved and I wouldn't want to let her do so at the tender age of 8. But nontheless, this will make things easier and I'm very happy :-) Thank you lord.

+++

The not so good news is that I have to have both of my two veg slashed open for biopsies, under a general anesthetic - they're looking for the early signs of cancer (something they refer to as "pre cancerous cells"). Fingers crossed, it's not urgent apparently so I've pushed it out until the end of May.

Something about giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other springs to mind? :-)

Personal Responsibility

I've been running a crypto workshop all week and now know more about RSA, SHA-1 and TripleDES algorithms invoked from java on a z9 than I ever thought I would! A great experience where the customer achieved all of their objectives and more. People from Croatia are indeed a very friendly bunch and I learned a lot.

+++

Today is the 494th anniversary of Gerardus Mercator’s birth in 1512. The famed mapmaker went on to live a life of great moral courage. Mercator’s time was a rough one for astronomy and astronomers. Despite a prison sentence and threats of torture and death for his beliefs, Mercator went on to design a globe of the earth in 1541 and one for the heavens ten years later. One sphere within a larger one - and all without the many complexities envisioned by Ptolemy a millennium before him.

+++

Many thanks for the math link, I didn't realise that there was a "Pi day".

+++

I heard an objection to Christianity, that it is a morally corrosive doctrine because it undermines personal responsibility, encourages people to believe that God is going to solve all of their problems for them, kill all their enemies, and build them a whole new world.

There are parts of The Bible (OT especially) that sell this message and an extension of it - "it's not my fault - or even if it is, I can truly repent and I am forgiven" - seems quite Catholic, a religion in which you are able to "hang your sins upon the sky".

A better message comes from the New Testament, where personal responsibility is important, where one has to actively love one's neighbour, which is sometimes not easy. This is a moral commandment - or call - to an individual. I don't believe one should pray for the strength to love their neighbour - and then (if the strength does not come) - say "Oh well, it must be God's wish that I do not love this particular neighbour, as God did not give me the ability to do so".

And that person might also add "... God is telling me this because this particular neighbour is not saved/in the employ of Satan/etc, so it's OK not to love them".

I think this is the most offensive twisting of the doctrine of Christianity, perpetuated in some part by The Church and organized religion, but an attitude that appears to be endemnic where I come from.

Looking around, these reasons are those that cause people to attack the message of The Bible. I am trying to avoid acting in such a way that causes others to attack Christianity.

+++

Happy Sunday to you Brother !

Math Geeks Unite!

Have fun, friend:

http://www.mathematicianspictures.com/

The ID Debate

Interesting article. I stopped comprehending the chemistry of that about the second sentence. Chemistry was never my strong suit. NaCL ... what?

I once read the book, "The Case for a Creator," which was a recitation of the various arguments for the ID proposition. Some were more compelling than others. For instance, I think any discussion about "the soul" -- and using "the soul" as the basis for evidence of our intelligent design -- is automatically one of pure speculation. It weakens the overall argument to introduce that.

Similarly, I think the discussions about the "finely tuned universe" are intriguing, but there's so much speculation in the whole realm of the astro-physics that I'm not sure I can base my strong suggestion of an intelligent designer on that either.

But the topic of the origin of life from basic molecular elements, and how from that might come the extraordinarily elegant structure of a single cell ... well, now we're talking. To me, this is by far the most intriguing area. This is pure science at that level -- the chemistry is well know, the biology is well known. That's not to say the origins of it all are understood, but the mechanics are understood, and subject to rigorous controlled scientific experimentation.

To the best of my knowledge, nobody has adequately proven that elemental molecules could, on their own, form up simple amino acids, let alone more complex proteins, let alone RNA, let alone DNA, let alone a cell, let alone a bacteria, let alone an amoeba ... you get the point. Nobody has absolutely refuted it, either. I'm not sure that argument is even subject to proof or refutation.

Note: from what I understand -- and I don't understand the chemistry behind it -- the famous experiment from the 50's or 60's showing amino acids being formed from a controlled environment of organic gases and lightning was considerably flawed. It is cited as one of those things that despite its flaws, the "conclusion" found its way into "accepted fact," and that's where it's been ever since.

Now, there's a little bit of the same false logic being employed by both sides here, it seems.:

• Advocates of ID point to the lack of scientic proof for the naturalistic creation of life-forming proteins and say, "Ha! Therefore ID is possible, therefore it's true!"
• Advocates of naturalism point to the lack of scientific refutation of the theory (i.e., lack of "falsification") and say, "Ha! Therefore naturalism is possible, therefore it's true!"

For me ... I just got done scritching the chin of my sleepy cat. What's that prove?

Absolutely nothing! :-)

An Intelligent Creator

Gibson, LJ --- Did Life Begin in an RNA World? The origin of genetic information. Scientific American 244(4):88-118. Ferris JP and G. Ertem. 1992. Oligomerization of ribonucleotides on montmorillonite: ... http://www.grisda.org/origins/20045.htm

Conclusion:

Considering the conditions necessary for the establishment of life, it appears that the most plausible explanation for the origin of life is an intelligent creator."

I kid you not.

:-)

Pursuits

I wouldn't think that the pursuits of pleasures are in and of themselves bad. The Lord made many things to be beautiful and pleasurable. Sex is beautiful and pleasurable, but it can be a terrible intoxicant if one's pursuit becomes unleashed.

Similarly, striving towards not pursuing pleasures can itself become an idol. It's a form of asceticism, isn't it?

Note: dictionary.com: 1: "The principles and practices of an ascetic; extreme self-denial and austerity." 2: "The doctrine that the ascetic life releases the soul from bondage to the body and permits union with the divine."

The Christian faith has a tradition of asceticism in some of the monastic orders. I'm not sure sure that's supported by scripture, but it's also not prohibited. It may be a personal thing -- for some, pursuing the ascetic life might be the only way in which they can free themselves to then pursue God. And pursuing God is something we are definitely called to do.

What I'm stumbling over is your use of the term "peace." By that do you mean a kind of suspension of an internal struggle, perhaps caused by pleasures or the pursuit of them? Or are you thinking of something else. I have a hard time with that world, just like I do the word "love." There's too much historical baggage associated with it.

I think it's safe to say that there is too much obsessive pursuit of pleasure in today's society. I'm a little unclear on what you meant by "The Church enticing children with the pleasures of alcohol" -- are you referring to using real wine for communion?